Cluster of wheat image Grapes and vines image Cluster of wheat image
February 3rd, 2012


When Judge Michael Malihi of Atlanta, Georgia, subpoenaed President Barack Obama to attend a hearing on January 26 regarding his eligibility to be on the Georgia ballot for the upcoming presidential election, I surely expected lots of media coverage. It has been claimed that Obama is not a natural-born citizen of the United States and therefore not eligible for candidacy.

What happened?

At the time, I had just witnessed an historic hearing that actually discussed the eligibility of the sitting president of the United States to run for a second term. The president had been subpoenaed to appear, and instead of his attorney respectfully following protocol to have that subpoena recalled, both Obama and his attorney, Michael Jablonski, simply failed to show up at all or offer any defense whatsoever.

Read more at American Thinker.

As Attorney Inon of the Liberty Legal Foundation pointed out:  “Yesterday President Obama completely ignored a court subpoena, and the world shrugged.”

Counsel for the plaintiff, Orly Taitz, requested a decision based on the merits of the evidence — of a fraudulently obtained Social Security number, a Hawaiian birth certificate that is a computer-generated forgery, that he does not possess valid U. S. identification papers, and that he did not use his legal name on his notice of candidacy. The judge found the evidence “not persuasive” and did not charge Obama with contempt of court for his non-appearance.
In a 10-page order, Judge Michael Malihi turned down a challenge filed by members of the so-called “birther” movement.  Obama was born in the U.S., Malihi said. “Therefore … he became a citizen at birth and is a natural born citizen.”   Malihi’s finding now goes to the Georgia Secretary of State’s Office, which will make the final determination.
 Doug Vogt, typography expert,  here presents his evidence for forgery in the birth certificate.

Folowing: You are there at the Georgia Court House –

What do YOU think?  Vogt will be presenting his evidence to the FBI.

P.S.  This summary of the court case became available later and I add it for the sake of completeness.

By Craig Andresen on January 26, 2012 at 9:25 am

Given the testimony from today’s court case in Georgia , Obama has a lot of explaining to do. His attorney, Jablonski, was a NO SHOW as of course, was Obama.

The following is a nutshell account of the proceedings.

Promptly at 9am  EST, all attorneys involved in the Obama Georgia eligibility case were called to the Judge’s chambers. This was indeed a very interesting beginning to this long awaited and important case.

The case revolved around the Natural Born clause of the Constitution and whether or not Obama qualifies under it to serve. More to the point, if found ineligible, Obama’s name would not appear on the 2012 ballot in Georgia .

With the small courtroom crowded, several in attendance could be seen fanning themselves with pamphlets as they waited for the return of the attorneys and the appearance of the judge.

Obama himself, who had been subpoenaed to appear, of course was nowhere near Georgia . Instead, Obama was on a campaign swing appearing in Las Vegas and in Colorado ignoring the court in Georgia .

Over the last several weeks, Obama’s attorney, Michael Jablonski, had attempted several tactics to keep this case from moving forward. He first tried to have it dismissed, then argued that it was irrelevant to Obama. After that, Jablonski argued that a state could not, under the law, determine who would or would not be on a ballot and later, that Obama was simply too busy with the duties of office to appear.

After all these arguments were dispatched by the Georgia Court, Jablonski, in desperation, wrote to the Georgia Secretary of State attempting to place Obama above the law and declared that the case was not to he heard and neither he nor his client would participate.

Secretary of State, Brian Kemp, fired back a letter hours later telling Jablonski he was free to abandon the case and not participate but that he would do so at his and his clients peril.

Game on.
5 minutes.
10 minutes.
15 minutes with the attorneys in the judge’s chambers.
20 minutes.

It appears Jablonski is not in attendance as the attorneys return, all go to the plaintiff table 24 minutes after meeting in the judge’s chambers.

Has Obama’s attorney made good on his stated threat not to participate? Is he directly ignoring the court’s subpoena? Is he placing Obama above the law? It seems so. Were you or I subpoenaed to appear in court, would we or our attorney be allowed such action or, non action?

Certainly not.

Court is called to order.

Obama’s birth certificate is entered into evidence.

Obama’s father’s place of birth, Kenya East Africa is entered into evidence.

Pages 214 and 215 from Obama’s book, “Dreams from My Father” entered into evidence. Highlighted. This is where Obama indicates that, in 1966 or 1967 that his father’s history is mentioned. It states that his father’s passport had been revoked and he was unable to leave Kenya .

Immigration Services documents entered into evidence regarding Obama Sr.

June 27th, 1962, is the date on those documents. Obama’s father’s status shown as a non citizen of the United States . Documents were gotten through the Freedom of Information Act.

Testimony regarding the definition of Natural Born Citizen is given citing Minor vs Happersett opinion from a Supreme Court written opinion from 1875. The attorney points out the difference between “citizen” and “Natural Born Citizen” using charts and copies of the Minor vs Happersett opinion.

It is also pointed out that the 14th Amendment does not alter the definition or supersede the meaning of Natural Born. It is pointed out that lower court rulings do not conflict with the Supreme Court opinion nor do they over rule the Supreme Court Minor vs Happersett opinion.

The point is, to be a natural born citizen, one must have 2 parents who, at the time of the birth in question, be citizens of the United States . As Obama’s father was not a citizen, the argument is that Obama, constitutionally, is ineligible to serve as President.

Judge notes that as Obama nor his attorney is present, action will be taken accordingly.

Carl Swinson takes the stand.

Testimony is presented that the SOS has agreed to hear this case, laws applicable, and that the DNC of Georgia will be on the ballot and the challenge to it by Swinson.

2nd witness, a Mr. Powell, takes the stand and presents testimony regarding documents of challenge to Obama’s appearance on the Georgia ballot and his candidacy.

Court records of Obama’s mother and father entered into evidence.

Official certificate of nomination of Obama entered into evidence.

RNC certificate of nomination entered into evidence.

DNC language does NOT include language stating Obama is Qualified while the RNC document DOES. This shows a direct difference trying to establish that the DNC MAY possibly have known that Obama was not qualified.

Jablonski letter to Kemp yesterday entered into evidence showing their desire that these proceedings not take place and that they would not participate.

Dreams From My Father entered.

Mr. Allen from Tuscon AZ sworn in.

Disc received from Immigration and Naturalization Service entered into evidence. This disc contains information regarding the status of Obama’s father received through the Freedom of Information Act.

This information states clearly that Obama’s father was NEVER a U.S. Citizen.

At this point, the judge takes a recess.

The judge returns.

David Farrar takes the stand.

Evidence showing Obama’s book of records listing his nationality as Indoneasan. Deemed not relevant by the judge.

Orly Taitz calls 2nd witness. Mr. Strump.

Enters into evidence a portion of letter received from attorney showing a renewal form from Obama’s mother for her passport listing Obama’s last name something other than Obama.

State Licensed PI takes the stand.

She was hired to look into Obama’s background and found a Social Security number for him from 1979. Professional opinion given was that this number was fraudulent. The number used or attached to Obama in 1979, shows that Obama was born in the 1890. This shows that the number was originally assigned to someone else who was indeed born in 1890 and should never have been used by Obama.

Same SS number came up with addresses in IL, D.C. and MA.

Next witness takes the stand.

This witness is an expert in information technology and photo shop. He testifies that the birth certificate Obama provided to the public is layered, multiple layered. This, he testifies, indicates that different parts of the certificate have been lifted from more than one original document.

Linda Jordan takes the stand.

Document entered regarding SS number assigned to Obama. SS number is not verified under E Verify. It comes back as suspected fraudulent. This is the system by which the Government verifies ones citizenship.

Next witness.

Mr. Gogt.

Expert in document imaging and scanners for 18 years.

Mr. Gogt testifies that the birth certificate, posted online by Obama, is suspicious. States white lines around all the type face is caused by “unsharp mask” in Photoshop. Testifies that any document showing this, is considered to be a fraud.

States this is a product of layering.

Mr. Gogt testifies that a straight scan of an original document would not show such layering.

Also testifies that the date stamps shown on Obama documents should not be in exact same place on various documents as they are hand stamped. Obama’s documents are all even, straight and exactly the same indicating they were NOT hand stamped but layered into the document by computer.

Next witness, Mr. Sampson a former police officer and former immigration officer specializing in immigration fraud.

Ran Obama’s SS number through database and found that the number was issued to Obama in 1977 in the state of MA. Obama never resided in MA. At the time of issue, Obama was living in Hawaii .

Serial number on birth certificate is out of sequence with others issued at that hospital. Also certification is different than others and different than twins born 24 hours ahead of Obama.

Mr. Sampson also states that portion of documents regarding Mr. Sotoroe, who adopted Obama have been redated which is highly unusual with regards to immigration records.

Suggests all records from Social Security, Immigration and Hawaii birth records be made available to see if there are criminal charges to be filed. Without them, nothing can be ruled out.

Mr. Sampson indicates if Obama is shown not to be a citizen, he should be arrested and deported. Until all records are released nobody can know for sure if he is or is not a U.S. Citizen.

Taitz shows records for Barry Sotoro aka Barack Obama, showing he resides in Hawaii and in Indonesia at the same time.

Taitz takes the stand herself.

Testifies that records indicate Obama records have been altered and he is hiding his identity and citizenship.

Taitz leave the stand to make her closing arguments.

Taitz states that Obama should be found, because of the evidence presented, ineligible to serve as President.

And with that, the judge closes the hearing.

What can we take away from this?

It’s interesting.

Now, all of this has finally been entered OFFICIALLY into court records.

One huge question is now more than ever before, unanswered.


Without his attorney present, Obama’s identity, his Social Security number, his citizenship status, and his past are all OFFICIALLY in question.

One thing to which there seems no doubt. He does NOT qualify, under the definition of Natural Born Citizen” provided by SCOTUS opinions, to be eligible to serve as President.

What will the judge decide? That is yet to be known, but it seems nearly impossible to believe, without counter testimony or evidence, because Obama and his attorney chose not to participate, that Obama will be allowed on the Georgia ballot.

It also opens the door for such cases pending or to be brought in other states as well.

Obama is in it deep and the DNC has a LOT of explaining to do unless they start looking for a new candidate for 2012.


November 29th, 2011


I have a thinking, caring grandson who is Occupying Boston! There has been so much to post about this “occupation” that I have posted nothing. At the moment I am posting his reasoning for doing what he does simply because I have accumulated so much data that I don’t know what to do with it all.  However, meet Sage, my thinking, caring grandson –

(Facebook has carried some amazing dialogues lately!)

Sage’s Profile · Sage’s Wall

Sage Radachowsky
Dear Christopher,

Thank you for visiting me the first time, and the second time that you came to the Occupy Boston encampment.

I want to share this video with you:

This is Vietnam veteran Jim Scarborough, who spoke at Occupy Boston on Sunday, November 27th, the day after you came to visit.

From the bio, I respect Dr Sowell and read his words with great respect and thoughtfulness. I respect the mechanism of the free market greatly, but I do not hold it as the highest ideal, or the most ideal organizing principle of social life. I think it has a very important place in organization of society’s production and efficiency, but when taken as the sole organizing principle, the libertarian worship of the free market is very harmful. Holding private property and freedom only to enter markets as the sole freedoms is not true to humanity. Humans are economic beings, but they are also caring social beings. There are many factors that laissez-faire economics relegates to “externalities” that are critically important to human welfare and survival. These cannot be disregarded.

From his first paragraph, I have trouble with saying that the Occupy supporters are unaccomplished, ignorant, or lawless.

There is indeed a spirit of anarchism, in the most favorable meaning of the word, which means the idea that people can organize themselves by free association to solve problems and to help themselves, through mutual aid, to solve the problems and provide the necessities of living. This is not a rejection of governance, but a desire to make the forms of governance in a custom way to solve the problems at hand.

True, there are many “lifestyle anarchists” who find rebellion against all rules attractive for the sake of rebellion alone. This is not me, and it is not many of the people in the movement. It is true of too many, but it is not true of all. That is too vague a generalization.

I also think that some of those who have great wealth have not sacrificed greatly, but rather find that they can use their existing wealth to shape government policy to suit their own ends, and to provide them more wealth. This is not laissesz-faire free market, but rather crony capitalism. Both the Tea Party and the Occupy movement share their opposition to crony capitalism.

I think the Tea Party objectives, originally, were more toward laissez-faire markets as a policy goal, whereas the Occupy movement tends toward more socialist policies. However, this is a blanket statement and not true across the board. There are libertarians, and there are centrists within the Occupy movement. I am one of the latter. I believe in a strong reliance on the market, and on self-reliance and self-made wealth. I do not like the idea that some people are born into much greater wealth than others. I would like people to be able to pass their wealth on to their offspring, and to anyone else they choose to bestow favor upon, but I would like to see some limits in the form of inheritance and gift taxation. I think that the feedback loops need to be tempered, or else the accumulation of wealth becomes too highly aggregated, and people are born into far too vast levels of inequality of opportunity.

Note that I say “inequality of opportunity” and not “inequality of income or wealth”. I accept the need for a level of inequality, as a motivating factor, and as the just reward for hard work. However, some wealth is truly derived just from the accident of birth. Both of my parents were janitors at one point in their lives. My father then entered the post office, and my mother became a medical transcriptionist and a massage therapist. They did better their positions, but they started near the bottom. Through accident and hard work, I ended up working at Harvard, though I am still in debt to my education and my time spent trying to make a living as a carpenter. I have built several houses, and I have renovated several condominiums. Still, I did not make much money, and I also spent much time and money to help others less fortunate than myself, through Habitat for Humanity and Peace Brigades International. I would like to think that everyone has the opportunity to spend a portion of their energy in service to humanity, though in actual fact, it landed me in debt at the age of 38, while I did work nearly full-time since the age of 18.

On Dr Sowell’s second paragraph, the Occupy movement does not honor dictators, murderers, and thieves. To the contrary, it condemns dictators, murderers, and thieves. It condemns some policies of the United States, particularly wealth gained from slavery of human beings, of exploitation through military domination of some countries, like the banana republics, and of thieves in the form of thugs who bought government policy and “justice” to benefit their own bank accounts. Such things as the violent repression of labor organizers, who were killed in the organizing of free associations of laborers to try to gain a higher wage for the sale of their life-force, and in buying of government policy to uproot people from the land that they inhabited due to the presence of mineral riches under the ground.

If you take the time to view the video that I presented, you will see attorney and veteran Jim Scarborough not shred, but honor, the documents created by the founding fathers. While not perfect in all regards, these living documents provide a deep foundation for the freedoms of speech, association, and assembly, that allow a free people to analyze the situation of their time, and to redress their grievances.

The founding fathers petitioned for redress of grievances of an external colonial power. Today, the Occupy movement petitions for redress of grievances against an internal colonizing power. This is merely a geographical distinction, and in the globalized age, it loses meaning. The essential element is that there is one party that is controlling the levers of government to maximize the extraction of money/power from another party.

In our present society, the wealthy elite — those who can afford to fund campaigns to get their people elected, and those who can hire lobbyists on K Street to get their policies enacted — have distorted our supposed democracy to their own benefit.

A press machine is also complicit, which distracts the common people from the real issues at hand, with wedge issues of lifestyle choices, and with the false dichotomy between the Republican “right” and the Democrat “left”, which are really almost the same party with about 5% difference between them on economic policy. The press machine is also funded by the wealthy elite. This is not total, but it is very real and effective. Fox News is more complicit, MSNBC and NPR are a bit less complicit, but both are complicit enough. The debate is framed such that the spread of difference is small enough to be but a nuisance to those who seek to maintain the status quo because it suits them.

What I want is nothing less and nothing more than a real democracy. This would be a system where money cannot buy power.

I want to enact mechanisms where money cannot buy power. This will never fully be realized, but it can be made much better than it currently is.

From that ground, we would have a more level field, where issues can be debated on their own merits, and the fine points of policy can be ironed out with the intensive recursive debate that is warranted to make this society the best possible, with all the required compromises.

Nothing will be perfect, and I do not expect perfection. I expect to move to version 2.0 of society, where it is head and shoulders above what we have now. From there, we will see the next mountaintop in the distance, and then strike out anew for a more perfect union.

I do not like communism. I spent 10 years — off and on — in Nepal, where the Communist Party of Nepal waged an armed rebellion against the government of the King of Nepal.

I pledged allegiance to neither side of this conflict. I stood firmly in the middle, with the common people. I lived in a village in the Himalayas, by the name of Nangi, in Myagdi district, in the Annapurna region. I worked in the fields with common people. I taught in the village school. I listened to the villagers. I learned the facts of life. I learned how common people lived, and what they believed.

I did not buy the propaganda of the Maoists, nor of the Royal Government of Nepal. Both sides in the war ultimately sought to exploit the people. I stood only for loktantra, which means “people’s democracy”. This meant neither a Maoist state, nor a Royal state. This meant a messy compromise government that would leave the people alone as much as possible, to pursue their own goals through hard work and innovation. There is no perfect answer, but there are some that are far more perfect, and very clearly so, than the ends of any dogmatic caste, be it communist or royalist. People lived in a serfdom before the revolution, and luckily the revolution ended in a stalemate where the Maoist ends were not met. The present government of Nepal is a faltering compromise, but this is far better for the common people than either a continuation of the royal fiefdom or a pseudo-communist state similar to the Cambodian model.

Lastly, I must add that the Occupy movement is not a puppet of Obama. There are some in the movement who earlier found some hope in the ideals of Obama, and still hold some hope in his leadership, but this is not the majority of Occupiers. Obama cannot control the Occupy movement, and Occupy does not endorse Obama. We are not fooled by the new boss, same as the old boss. I personally admire Obama as a person, but know that he has shortcomings both from within and from the constraints of the system that of which he has become the figurehead.

To the list of Democrat Party demagogues that Sowell lists, I would also add a similar list from the Republican Party. They are not very far apart, when it comes down to it. They differ as do Tweedledee and Tweedledum. They differ by 5%, on some important issues, but not on the full frame of possible realities.

The final quote, which positions and knocks down “socialism” as a straw man owned by Obama and his allies, is just that — a straw man. “Socialism” is an overused term. Public libraries are “socialist”. The interstate highway system is “socialist”. Government itself is “socialist” in that it is something implemented by a common agreement that something seems like it would be a good idea, to such an extent that people use the principle of eminent domain to demand that everyone pay a share of it. Anyone who argues against paying a share of the cost of public roads seems to me a dinosaur, a fossil of an extinct species.

In Nepal, people in every village spend a few days per year working on the pathways between the villages. Everyone who is able is expected to contribute a day or two of their labor toward maintaining the paths upon which people and mules tread, to carry the salt and tea and sugar between villages, and on which everyone walks when they want to travel to the next village. I don’t think that people resent this. They may try to evade their labor, but it is not such a big deal. Others will work a little more, to make up for the labor that some shirk. If the system is efficient enough, people will recognize that perfection is not attainable, but good enough surely is, and will be happy to be alive in this wonderful world, and even whistle and sing songs while they place stones on the pathway.

I hope you comprehend my critique of Dr Sowell’s text on the Occupy movement.

With great hopes for continuing dialogue,




Sage was writing in response to Thomas Sowell’s article below:

A shining light in a sea of darkness…
Thomas Sowell (born June 30, 1930) is an American economist, social theorist, political philosopher, and author. A National Humanities Medal winner, he advocates laissez-faire economics and writes from a libertarian perspective. He is currently a Rose and Milton Friedman Senior Fellow on Public Policy at the Hoover Institution at Stanford University. Sowell was born in North Carolina, but grew up in Harlem, New York. He dropped out of high school and served in the United States Marine Corps during the Korean War. He received a bachelor’s degree from Harvard University in 1958 and a master’s degree from Columbia University in 1959. In 1968, he earned his doctorate degree in economics from the University of Chicago. Dr. Sowell has served on the faculties of several universities, including Cornell and University of California, Los Angeles, and worked for “think tanks” such as the Urban Institute. Since 1980 he has worked at the Hoover Institution. He is the author of more than 30 books. 

By Dr. Sowell

The current Occupy Wall Street movement is the best illustration to date of what President Barack Obama’s America looks like. It is an America where the lawless, unaccomplished, ignorant and incompetent rule. It is an America where those who have sacrificed nothing pillage and destroy the lives of those who have sacrificed greatly.

It is an America where history is rewritten to honor dictators, murderers and thieves. It is an America where violence, racism, hatred, class warfare and murder are all promoted as acceptable means of overturning the American civil society.

It is an America where humans have been degraded to the level of animals: defecating in public, having sex in public, devoid of basic hygiene. It is an America where the basic tenets of a civil society, including faith, family, a free press and individual rights, have been rejected. It is an America where our founding documents have been shredded and, with them, every person’s guaranteed liberties.

It is an America where, ultimately, great suffering will come to the American people, but the rulers like Obama, Michelle Obama, Harry Reid, Nancy Pelosi, Barney Frank, Chris Dodd, Joe Biden, Jesse Jackson, Louis Farrakhan, liberal college professors, union bosses and other loyal liberal/Communist Party members will live in opulent splendor.

It is the America that Obama and the Democratic Party have created with the willing assistance of the American media, Hollywood , unions, universities, the Communist Party of America, the Black Panthers and numerous anti-American foreign entities.

Barack Obama has brought more destruction upon this country in four years than any other event in the history of our nation, but it is just the beginning of what he and his comrades are capable of.

The Occupy Wall Street movement is just another step in their plan for the annihilation of America.

“Socialism, in general, has a record of failure so blatant that only an intellectual could ignore or evade it.”

Thomas Sowell

October 4th, 2011


I’d call this hard-hitting. It speaks for itself. Michael Voris is not one to mince words!

Letter from Archbishop Timothy Dolan of New York to President Obama
written “with a growing sense of urgency.”

October 3rd, 2011


This just arrived by email.  Yep, that’s the way it is.

The folks who are getting free stuff,
Don’t like the folks who are paying for the free stuff,
Because the folks who are paying for the free stuff,
Can no longer afford to pay for both the free stuff and their own stuff.

And, The folks who are paying for the free stuff,
Want the free stuff to stop.
And the folks who are getting the free stuff,
Want even MORE free stuff on top of the free stuff they’re getting  already!

Now….. The people who are forcing  people to PAY for the free stuff,
Have told the people who are RECEIVING the free stuff,
That the people who are PAYING for the free stuff,
Are being mean, prejudiced and racist and now Terrorists.
So …. the people who are GETTING the free stuff,
Have been convinced they need to HATE the people who are PAYING for the free stuff because they are selfish. And they are promised more free stuff if they will vote for the people who force the people who pay for the free stuff to give them even more free stuff.
And – – – – – that’s the Straight Stuff!

September 5th, 2011


It was about thirty years ago that the reality of media bias first hit home. I was becoming a pro-life activist and had finally made the six hour trek to Washington DC to protest legalized abortion and stand for the right to life of every human being. The crowd was awesome! People came on buses from the mid-west and the south, whole familes, whole schools, every ethnicity, every color, Jews, Christians, and just plain pro-lifers. When I stood before the Supreme Court and looked down the avenue there were people marching as far as the eye could see, curb to curb, singing, praying, witnessing. It was estimated that several hundred thousand were present and I looked forward to reading all about it in my local paper where I hoped to learn the official estimate of the crowd size.

Duh. Now I know. Don’t expect anything like decent coverage just because several hundred thousand are amassed. Inside my home newspaper (nothing on the front page, of course) were two black and white photos, one of a few pro-lifers holding their signs, another of a couple who were pro-choice. I imagine they called that coverage fair and balanced. I didn’t remember seeing any pro-choicers at all. The reporter surely had to hunt for them!

Since then I’ve read time and time again that mainstream media (MSM) leans heavily to the left. Of course those on the left think that is nonsense and of course they think we conservatives don’t know what we’re talking about.

Tim Groseclose, Ph. D.,  author of the recently published Left Turn:    How Liberal Media Bias Distorts the American Mind, thinks that within political science there is a small area of real science in which truths can be demonstrated with graphs and mathematics.  It is possible to accurately quantify the number of times an event is reported and the minutes spent reporting it. He has come up with what he calls a PQ (political quotient) which is a valuable indication of bias in media or in politicians.

According to Groseclose media bias is more a sin of omission rather than deliberate inaccuracy. They cover what suits their ideology. You hear nothing about evidence to the contrary.

Another such book is Bias:  A CBS Insider Exposes How the Media Distorts the News, by Bernard Goldberg (2003).  He followed this by A Slobbering Love Affair:  The True (and Pathetic) Story of the Torrid Romance Between Barack Obama and the Mainstream Media (2009). An award-winning journalist several times over, Goldberg is now with Fox News.

On August 28, 2010, Glenn Beck held the Restoring Honor rally in Washington DC. I was impressed enough to blog about it, calling it a “watershed event.”   I know better now than to be disappointed that it got little press or TV coverage.

Those who rely on television and newspapers are going to get a severely skewed picture of what is actually going on in the world. Were it not for blogs, social media and radio would there, could there, be a Tea Party?

Last month over a million young folk from around the world gathered for a week in Madrid, Spain, to pray and to listen. It seems to me that would be a matter of great import. But did you hear about it?

World Youth Day, Madrid, 2011

Keep tuned, but not just to MSM.  At the above World Youth Day Pope Benedict told the young folks that they “will be swimming against the tide in a society with a relativistic culture which wishes neither to seek nor hold on to the truth.”  Right on,  Benny!

August 4th, 2011


It’s a jungle out there. The World Wide Web is a tangle, a superabundance, a plethora of information and misinformation. Some of it is valuable, some a total waste of time, some actually harmful. You try to find to your way through the jungle and are overwhelmed by the massiveness of the task. You realize that there are people out there who much more intelligent than you who are trying to do the same thing, who are working harder at it than you are. So you look for someone who can show you the way. That’s when you find out there are some guides that are trustworthy and some that have ulterior motives. You listen carefully and study as well as you can but in the end decide that you have to listen to your gut, to your intuition, when choosing a guide that will not lead you astray. Truthfulness becomes especially important. Does your guide have your well-being at heart as well as his own self-interest?

Truth has no agenda. Love seeks the well-being of the beloved. You do your feeble best at trying to find guides who are coming from a place of truth and love. You pray for guidance in discerning goodness — because goodness comes from a place of truth and love.

The best I can do in this blog is to point to people who seem good and ring true to me, who I think are worthy of a hearing. One such is Jeannie DeAngelis who writes in American Thinker. I think her take on what drives Obama is worthy of consideration.

Cloward-Piven Paradise Now?
By Jeannie DeAngelis

Combine class warfare, demonizing the rich, getting as many people onto the welfare rolls as possible, and pushing the economic system to collapse and you have a flawless formula for Cloward-Piven 2.0 — and a vehicle that ensures Obama remains in power.

Cloward-Piven is a much talked-about strategy proposed in the mid-1960’s by two Columbia University sociology professors named Richard Andrew Cloward and Frances Fox Piven. The Cloward-Piven approach was sometimes referred to as the “crisis strategy,” which they believed were a means to “end poverty.”

The premise of the Cloward-Piven collective/anti-capitalist gospel decried “individual mobility and achievement,” celebrated organized labor, fostered the principle that “if each finally found himself in the same relative economic relationship to his fellows … all were infinitely better off.”

The duo taught that if you flooded the welfare rolls and bankrupted the cities and ultimately the nation, it would foster economic collapse, which would lead to political turmoil so severe that socialism would be accepted as a fix to an out-of-control set of circumstances.

The idea was that if people were starving and the only way to eat was to accept government cheese, rather than starve, the masses would agree to what they would otherwise reject. In essence, for the socialist-minded, the Cloward-Piven strategy is a simple formula that makes perfect sense; the radical husband-and-wife team had Saul Alinsky as their muse, and they went on to teach his social action principles to a cadre of socialist-leaning community organizers, one of whom was Barack Obama.

As the debt crisis continues to worsen, President Obama stands idly by an inferno with his arms crossed, shaking his head, and doing nothing other than kinking the fire hose and closing the spigot. Spectator Obama is complaining that the structure of the American economy is engulfed in flames while accusing the Congress, which is trying desperately to douse the fire, of doing nothing about the problem.

Although speculative, if the Cloward-Piven strategy is the basis of the left’s game plan, spearheaded by Alinsky devotee Barack Obama, it certainly explains the President’s inaction and detached attitude.

The greatest nation in the history of the world is teetering on the brink of a catastrophic economic crisis. America was pushed to this point by a rapidly-expanding national debt and a stressed-out entitlement system; in the center of this crisis is the President, who insists on expanding it even further, all in the name “fairness” and “social justice.”

As a default date nears and the President threatens seniors that there’s a chance they may not receive their Social Security checks, it has been revealed that the federal government disperses a stunning 80 million checks a month, which means that about a third of the US adult population could be receiving some sort of entitlement.

Since the 1960’s when Cloward-Piven presented a socialistic guideline to usher in the type of evenhandedness Obama lauds, America’s entitlement rolls have swelled from eight million to 80 million. If the nation’s ability to disperse handouts were ever disrupted, it’s not hard to see how chaos would erupt should an angry army of millions demand what Cloward-Piven called “the right to income.”

Couple the threat of dried-up funds for food stamps, Social Security, unemployment benefits and the like with the Obama administration’s vigorous campaign to turn a tiny upper class of big earners into the enemy, and you have the Cloward-Piven recipe for anarchy and complete collapse.

If the worst happened, Saul Alinsky’s biggest fan, whose poll numbers continue to plummet, could use mayhem in the streets to remain firmly ensconced in the White House. Alinsky taught his students a basic principle that community organizer Barack Obama learned well: “Never let a good crisis go to waste.” Fiscal disintegration coupled with lawlessness would deliver the type of Cloward-Piven/Saul Alinsky trifecta that progressives have worked toward and waited decades for.

Barack Obama has spent the last 1,000+ days defying reason and choosing policy directions that seem nonsensical to the rational mind: a failed stimulus package; ObamaCare; growing the deficit to astronomical proportions; and cynically portraying wealth as immoral. Now, when cuts are the only fix to a budgetary balloon about to burst, a seemingly illogical President digs in and demands additional phantom dollars to spend on a system that is collapsing under the weight of unmanageable debt.

It’s hard to figure out the method to the President’s obvious madness, because based on Obama’s approval rating, if the election were held today even Pee Wee Herman could replace Obama behind the Resolute Desk. Maybe the “method” isn’t “mad” in the least!

Could it be that Barack Obama is purposely pressuring the system in a premeditated effort to foster a major crisis? One that would demand extraordinary measures to control by a President who could then mete out basic sustenance to Americans who would agree to anything to regain some sense of normalcy. And in the process successfully usher in the “socially just” system Barack Obama has dreamed of all his life.

While radical Alinsky/Cloward-Piven disciple Obama appears to be clueless and detached, it may be a ploy; he may actually be focused and engaged as he purposely pursues an Alinsky-inspired course of action to force the system to “live up” to its own rules. Obama’s ultimate goal of once-and-for-all discrediting the capitalist system and replacing America’s foundational economic and social tenets with a broad-based socialist one headed by progressive Marxists like himself, is actually within reach.

As Obama pushes and prods the US economy and instigates social unrest, it could be that he believes a Cloward-Piven-style utopia resides just beyond the horizon — a progressive panacea where an election-free, classless society, thankful for a simple crust of bread, looks to Barack Obama to keep the peace by remaining in power indefinitely.

Therefore, unless all of America, regardless of class or political persuasion, pays attention to the potential for a bleak future that lies ahead and realizes the President’s non-plan could be itself an actual calculated plan, the resulting consequences will affect everyone, as Barack Obama transforms a once great nation into Cloward and Piven’s idea of paradise.




I urge that supplications, prayers, intercessions, and thanksgivings be made for all men, for kings and all who are in high positions, that we may lead a quiet and p;eaceable life, godly and respectful in every way. — 1 Timothy 2

June 24th, 2011



Could the two be more diametrically opposed?

The President and First Lady hosted the first-of-its-kind LGBT Pride Month reception at the White House yesterday. On the heels of the 40th anniversary of the Stonewall Riots, the reception brought together LGBT families, volunteers, community leaders, lawmakers and heads of LGBT organizations to celebrate the LGBT community. (video here)

Every generation of Americans has brought our Nation closer to fulfilling its promise of equality. While progress has taken time, our achievements in advancing the rights of LGBT Americans remind us that history is on our side, and that the American people will never stop striving toward liberty and justice for all.

NOW, THEREFORE, I, BARACK OBAMA, President of the United States of America, by virtue of the authority vested in me by the Constitution and the laws of the United States, do hereby proclaim June 2011 as Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, and Transgender Pride Month. I call upon the people of the United States to eliminate prejudice everywhere it exists, and to celebrate the great diversity of the American people.

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand this thirty-first day of May, in the year of our Lord two thousand eleven, and of the Independence of the United States of America the two hundred and thirty-fifth.


(see entire proclamation here)


Whenever you hear a word from my mouth, you shall give them warning from me.  If I say to the wicked, O wicked one, you shall surely die, and you do not speak to warn the wicked to turn from his way, that wicked person shall die in his iniquity, but his blood I will require at your hand.  But if you warn the wicked to turn from his way, and he does not turn from his way, that person shall die in his iniquity, but you will have delivered your soul. — Ezekiel 33:7-9


May 2nd, 2011


Unaccustomed as we are to the techniques of photoshoppers, forgers, and forensic investigators we can only look at the evidence presented and try to figure things out. Welcome to the evidence. We know, at the start, that a president that promises transparency does not spend millions to prevent his long form birth certificate from being shown. Something is very fishy. What is he so determined to hide? And why?

Obama has no option but to make light of the whole birth certificate issue. He says we have more important things to deal with, but here, at the annual White House Correspondents Dinner, someone went to a lot of trouble of prepare Obama’s little talk.

It seems that Trump’s inquiring about Obama’s birth certificate prompted the appearance of the long-awaited long form. I wonder what will come forth after the release on May 17 of Jerome Corsi’s new book Where’s the Birth Certificate: The Case that Barack Obama is not Eligible to be President. It is already #1 on Amazon.

Time will tell. Personally, I hope Donald Trump realizes that I am counting on him for a final verdict on the “birther” issue. Why do I expect more truth from Trump than from Obama?

Donald Trump on our teflon President:



Critics argue Obama long form birth certificate is fake

Is Obama’s “birth certificate” a  fake?

Why does Obama have two different birth doctors?

pdf of birth certificate released April 2011

Obama Using Stolen Connecticut SS number

Further expert analysis of Obama document

Ex-CIA expert claims document forgery

Final report, expert evidence of photoshopped certificate:PDF

This video is the last thing I will post on this subject. SNOPES and FACT CHECK both contend Obama’s birth certificate is valid.

Later. Changed my mind. Expert photoshops similar certificate:

Also found this video!!!

Corsi/Breitbart, Sherif Joe Arpaio Cold Case Posse

April 2nd, 2011
March 29th, 2011


For more than 40 years, Lyle  Rossiter, MD.  has diagnosed and treated over 1,500 patients as a board-certified clinical psychiatrist and examined more than 2,700 civil and criminal cases, both state and federal, as a board-certified forensic psychiatrist retained by numerous public offices, courts and private attorneys. He received his medical and psychiatric training at the University of Chicago.

In his 2006 book, The Liberal Mind:  The Psychological Causes of Political Madness,  Rossiter explains with great clarity why the kind of liberalism being displayed by Barack Obama can only be understood as a psychological disorder.

“Based on strikingly irrational beliefs and emotions, modern liberals relentlessly undermine the most important principles on which our freedoms were founded,” says Rossiter. “Like spoiled, angry children, they rebel against the normal responsibilities of adulthood and demand that a parental government meet their needs from cradle to grave.”

“A social scientist who understands human nature will not dismiss the vital roles of free choice, voluntary cooperation and moral integrity – as liberals do,” he says. “A political leader who understands human nature will not ignore individual differences in talent, drive, personal appeal and work ethic, and then try to impose economic and social equality on the population – as liberals do. And a legislator who understands human nature will not create an environment of rules which overregulates and overtaxes the nation’s citizens, corrupts their character and reduces them to wards of the state – as liberals do.”

Dr. Rossiter says the liberal agenda preys on weakness and feelings of inferiority in the population by:

  • creating and reinforcing perceptions of victimization;
  • satisfying infantile claims to entitlement, indulgence and compensation;
  • augmenting primitive feelings of envy;
  • rejecting the sovereignty of the individual, subordinating him to the will of the government.

“The roots of liberalism – and its associated madness – can be clearly identified by understanding how children develop from infancy to adulthood and how distorted development produces the irrational beliefs of the liberal mind,” he says. “When the modern liberal mind whines about imaginary victims, rages against imaginary villains and seeks above all else to run the lives of persons competent to run their own lives, the neurosis of the liberal mind becomes painfully obvious.”

A reviewer of the book writes:
“I could see that the liberal agenda was economically unsound and even against the basic facts of human nature. Just when I was giving up any possibility of ever understanding the liberal mind and its irrational assaults on reason and human nature, I came across Dr. Rossiter’s book.”


There are none so blind as those who will not see. — Proverb